Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is the point. It IS an historical display for this month only.
I think this is the main thing we don't agree on. I don't perceive the main flagpole out in front of a government building as a historical display. It should only be for our country, state, and maybe city. Putting it in a historic display would be more appropriate. The confederate flag is as much a foreign flag as the Mexican flag, as was earlier mentioned.
On the other hand, it wouldn't be a big deal to me. I wouldn't be offended by it and I wouldn't raise a stir. I just think it isn't very patriotic.
This is a great answer for anyone who equates anything related to the Confederacy with racism. These are the folks who think anyone who flies the old Stars & Bars is just slavery-loving racist. There are many who would rather just dismiss any remembrance of that time.
So, let's not choose to get offended about a flag. Especially when they say it has nothing to do with race.
What does it have to do with though? For individuals to fly it, they have to support something the confederacy represents. If it's not slavery, what is it? Secession?
I hope I don't offend anyone, but I really don't understand where this Confederate pride comes from if it's not based in racism. Yes, all of America was racist during the Civil War (which is also something not to be proud of), but there were different attitudes toward slavery between the North and the South. People have a tendency to justify their immoral actions for the purpose of preserving their wealth and power. I believe the poor, non-slaveholders in the South went along because keeping blacks on the bottom rung of the socio-economic ladder made them feel like they were better than someone. If you read some of the writings of the southern citizenry after the war, you will find this to be true along with the lynchings and Jim Crow laws well after Reconstruction. Southern society was very aristocratic and there wasn't much room for upward mobility. South Carolina led the way in secession by writing a declaration clearly stating that a state's right to hold slaves was the main issue. Fighting for a state's right to deny human rights is just not something I would be proud of. Sorry. It's like being proud of the Third Reich which even had its own economic successes. The three-fifths compromise was already beyond stupid. In South Carolina's declaration of secession, the state says that blacks were not considered citizens under the Constitution. Then why should they be counted for representation? Anderson County can do whatever it wants. As a black person, I have no plans of ever moving to any small towns in East Texas. They can stay in the past and call it the "War of Northern Aggression" as long as they want.
Another thing to take into account is that millions of slaves died on slave ships. The South wanted to reopen the slave trade. I would say that some slave owners started their "humanitarian practices" after it became too costly to purchase new slaves or nearly impossible. When the slave trade first picked up in the U.S., slaves were dropping dead left and right from being overworked; something had to change because it was becoming too expensive.
What does it have to do with though? For individuals to fly it, they have to support something the confederacy represents. If it's not slavery, what is it? Secession?
The people of Anderson County made clear why they are flying the flag.
For me, I have my own views of the Confederacy. No, I don't believe in slavery. The Confederacy does represent states' rights, though.
I do think that it is a little rash to presume that many of those who fly the Mexican flag don't want to be part of the U.S. I expect that most of them are simply expressing pride for their own heritage.
Yes, and I said earlier that under those circumstances (that is, recognizing the Mexican heritage in Texas) then it would be appropriate. It isn't anything I would celebrate myself, but I could understand that some others might want to do so.
I think this is the main thing we don't agree on. I don't perceive the main flagpole out in front of a government building as a historical display. It should only be for our country, state, and maybe city. Putting it in a historic display would be more appropriate.
You are right in that we are going to have to agree to disagree on this. Again, for this officially designated history month in Texas, I think it is appropriate. Although, I would have no problem with it being part of a seperate display either.
Quote:
The confederate flag is as much a foreign flag as the Mexican flag, as was earlier mentioned.
Well, we are definitely going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Texas was a charter member state of the Confederacy, so in that sense it is not a foriegn flag at all. And since it no longer exists, it certainly isn't.
Well, you do present your argument in a fairly civil way, so let me respectfully reply by saying the analogy is not a good one.
Here is the difference between what was represented by the CSA Flag and that of Nazi Germany (to say nothing of that one is a part of Texas history and the other is one which many Texans/Southerners went off to stamp out):
***************
1. The Nazi policy of genocide for those races/groups deemed "sub-human." NOTHING remotely was comparable in Southern history.
2. At the time of the WBTS, slavery still existed in the Western world. And it was being struggled with in the same, as a moral question (in the American South as well). Whereas? Those enslaved in Nazi Germany were at a time when it had disappeared from said Western Civilization for almost a century...and then was brought back.
Too? Those enslaved by the nazi's were literally starved, beaten, and worked to death. Not even the severest critic of slavery as it existed in America alleges such inhumanity was commonplace. Sure, there were sadistic slaveowners, but there were still laws in the Southern states against deliberate mistreatment and slaveowners were obligated by law and common humanitarian/Christian ethics to take care of the sick, injured and old.
3. The Confederate States of America was a constitutional republic like the United States. Nazi Germany was a dictatorship. Free speech, religion, assembly, bearing arms, etc. did not exist in the latter, and in fact, could be punishable by death if deemed to be harmful to the state.
4. Nazi Germany pursued a militaristic and agressive foriegn policy with the intention of world domination. The Confederacy only wanted to be left alone and peacefully pursue its own destiny.
5. The political principles the South fought for were deeply rooted in those set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution (which itself had largely been written by Southerners).
*****************
I appreciate that you realize that I'm being civil, but let me put a hand up and stop you right here. You are proceeding as if I compared the Civil War to the Holocaust when I made it clear in my response to you that I was doing no such thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenshi
I think this is the main thing we don't agree on. I don't perceive the main flagpole out in front of a government building as a historical display. It should only be for our country, state, and maybe city. Putting it in a historic display would be more appropriate. The confederate flag is as much a foreign flag as the Mexican flag, as was earlier mentioned.
On the other hand, it wouldn't be a big deal to me. I wouldn't be offended by it and I wouldn't raise a stir. I just think it isn't very patriotic.
This is pretty much how I feel. I was born and raised here in Texas but all four of my grandparents came to the US either right before or during World War II in order to escape the Nazi pogroms. Therefore, the Confederate period is not part of my own heritage and I don't see it as anything to necessarily be ashamed of, but I don't see it as something to be proud of either.
I reiterate my point that the Confederate flag does not belong on the main flagpole on public land. It is unnecessarily provocative and there are so many other ways to commemorate Confederate history if you desire to do so.
To address a few of your points (and yes, this is a bit long! LOL)...
Quote:
Originally Posted by L210
I hope I don't offend anyone, but I really don't understand where this Confederate pride comes from if it's not based in racism. Yes, all of America was racist during the Civil War (which is also something not to be proud of), but there were different attitudes toward slavery between the North and the South.
That is fine if that is your outlook. On the other hand, for many of us, pride in our Conferate history has nothing at all to do with race or slavery. Rather, it is honoring the fighting spirits of our ancestors and pride in our Southern heritage.
You are right...in a certain realm. In any event, please don't think that certain anti-slavery opinion in the North equates with being pro-black. Matter of fact, some northern states had laws banning black residency. The anti-slavery opinion really came down to economic concerns...they didn't want the competition. That was a lot of why northern politicians objected to slavery in the western terrriories; they didn't want blacks there.
Quote:
People have a tendency to justify their immoral actions for the purpose of preserving their wealth and power. I believe the poor, non-slaveholders in the South went along because keeping blacks on the bottom rung of the socio-economic ladder made them feel like they were better than someone. If you read some of the writings of the southern citizenry after the war, you will find this to be true along with the lynchings and Jim Crow laws well after Reconstruction.
You are right, they do. Which is why many northern politicians used "preserving the Union" as an excuse to invade the South and keep their tax money!
Speaking of Jim Crow laws though? Did you know they are actually of northern origin?
The biggest difference in Southern dejure segregation and northern defacto, was that the former was just less hypocritical.
Quote:
Southern society was very aristocratic and there wasn't much room for upward mobility.
And northern society was equally elite...if not more so, and social mobility limited. In fact, if not more so. Related to this is why labor unions had a strength in the north while (and still do) pale by comparisson in the South.
Quote:
South Carolina led the way in secession by writing a declaration clearly stating that a state's right to hold slaves was the main issue. Fighting for a state's right to deny human rights is just not something I would be proud of. Sorry.
See below more on the South Carolina declaration. But ok, are you saying that blacks in that day and age had any more "human rights" in the North? The worst race riot in U.S. history was in New York City, among whites who blamed blacks for the War. It was not pretty.
Also, to wage a war to coerce a people back into a Union they no longer wanted to be part of -- going against the basic priniciple of government by consent of the governed -- is not much to be proud of, either.
Quote:
It's like being proud of the Third Reich which even had its own economic successes.
No, it isn't. The analogy is innacurate. For instance:
1. The Nazi policy of genocide for those races/groups deemed "sub-human." NOTHING remotely was comparable in Southern history.
2. At the time of the WBTS, slavery still existed in the Western world. And it was being struggled with in the same, as a moral question (in the American South as well). Whereas? Those enslaved in Nazi Germany were at a time when it had disappeared from said Western Civilization for almost a century...and then was brought back.
Too? Those enslaved by the nazi's were literally starved, beaten, and worked to death. Not even the severest critic of slavery as it existed in America alleges such inhumanity was commonplace. Sure, there were sadistic slaveowners, but there were still laws in the Southern states against deliberate mistreatment and slaveowners were obligated by law and common humanitarian/Christian ethics to take care of the sick, injured and old.
3. The Confederate States of America was a constitutional republic like the United States. Nazi Germany was a dictatorship. Free speech, religion, assembly, bearing arms, etc. did not exist in the latter, and in fact, could be punishable by death if deemed to be harmful to the state.
4. Nazi Germany pursued a militaristic and agressive foriegn policy with the intention of world domination. The Confederacy only wanted to be left alone and peacefully pursue its own destiny.
5. The political principles the South fought for were deeply rooted in those set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution (which itself had largely been written by Southerners).
Quote:
In South Carolina's declaration of secession, the state says that blacks were not considered citizens under the Constitution. Then why should they be counted for representation? Anderson County can do whatever it wants. As a black person, I have no plans of ever moving to any small towns in East Texas. They can stay in the past and call it the "War of Northern Aggression" as long as they want.
Yes, I have read the South Carolina declaration of causes...as well as those from all the 11 Confederate states. Four mention slavery specifically (South Carolina, Mississippi, Georgia and Texas). Of those, Georgia and Texas specifically mention other causes as well (such as the failure of the federal government to live up to the terms of the annexation agreement). The other seven states say nothing about slavery being the cause. So this needs to be qualified.
Quote:
Another thing to take into account is that millions of slaves died on slave ships. The South wanted to reopen the slave trade. I would say that some slave owners started their "humanitarian practices" after it became too costly to purchase new slaves or nearly impossible. When the slave trade first picked up in the U.S., slaves were dropping dead left and right from being overworked; something had to change because it was becoming too expensive.
The constitution of the CSA outlawed the slave trade. The slave trade itself was a purely northern commodity. Not a single slave ship was ever chartered out of the Southern port. Again, a link:
In closing, let me mention again I am glad this debate/discussion has remained very civil. On such a volitile historical topic, it is not always the case (in fact, usually isn't!). Reasonable people can disagree, and this seems to be the case here.
Anyway, from the historical perspective of what Anderson County is doing during this particular month, I think this resolution concerning the Confederate Flag -- by the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War --is very interesting and appropriate:
I appreciate that you realize that I'm being civil, but let me put a hand up and stop you right here. You are proceeding as if I compared the Civil War to the Holocaust when I made it clear in my response to you that I was doing no such thing.
If I misunderstood you, then I apologize. However, even so, many DO (see above post and reply) so I felt it necessary to nip that particular argument (even if you are not making it). It comes up a lot, and it is historically innacurate.
Quote:
This is pretty much how I feel. I was born and raised here in Texas but all four of my grandparents came to the US either right before or during World War II in order to escape the Nazi pogroms. Therefore, the Confederate period is not part of my own heritage and I don't see it as anything to necessarily be ashamed of, but I don't see it as something to be proud of either.
Given your own family history, I can understand where you are coming from. Just so long as you accept and acknowledge that for many of us, it is an important part of our history and heritage, and race has nothing to do with it.
Quote:
I reiterate my point that the Confederate flag does not belong on the main flagpole on public land. It is unnecessarily provocative and there are so many other ways to commemorate Confederate history if you desire to do so.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of people out there who go around looking for an excuse to "get offended" or consider themselves "provoked". I say again, if there is anyone to "blame" for a "controversy", then it is the news media which made a big ado about not much, anyway. If that clip had not aired-- in a provocative way in its own right -- doubtful one person in a hundred would have ever been aware of it. And to repeat also, the Stars and Bars (not to be confused with the rectangular version of the Battle Flag), flies over public property on many public lands within Texas.
TexasReb, we just have to agree to disagree. I personally find it hard to be proud of the whole nation during that period going on back to when the country was first founded. This country was not a democracy or republic for the millions of blacks and Native Americans inhabiting it. So in that respect, I don't see how the country being a republic for only white men makes it stand out so much from Nazi Germany.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
